I'm a Flex newbie and was wondering if it is possible to have multiple definitions for the same name in Flex. Such as:
/* DEFINITIONS */
FRUITS "APPLE" | "ORANGE" | "LEMON"
Also, what can we do and not do with string constants in flex's regular expressions? Can we use symbols such as $ and *? Thank you!
The right side of a definition is an ordinary regular expression, so you could write
FRUIT APPLE|ORANGE|LEMON
or perhaps
FRUIT (PINE)?APPLE|GRAPE(FRUIT)?|ORANGE|LEMON
and refer to it later in the rules section with
{FRUIT}
but I doubt that you would really want to. It's a crude way to recognize keyword tokens.
It's best to use definitions (think of them as macros) like these examples:
LETTER [a-zA-Z]
DIGIT [0-9]
ALPHANUMERIC [a-zA-Z0-9]
Related
I am writing a simple scanner in flex. I want my scanner to print out "integer type seen" when it sees the keyword "int". Is there any difference between the following two ways?
1st way:
%%
int printf("integer type seen");
%%
2nd way:
%%
"int" printf("integer type seen");
%%
So, is there a difference between writing if or "if"? Also, for example when we see a == operator, we print something. Is there a difference between writing == or "==" in the flex file?
There's no difference in these specific cases -- the quotes(") just tell lex to NOT interpret any special characters (eg, for regular expressions) in the quoted string, but if there are no special characters involved, they don't matter:
[a-z] printf("matched a single letter\n");
"[a-z]" printf("matched the 5-character string '[a-z]'\n");
0* printf("matched zero or more zero characters\n");
"0*" printf("matched a zero followed by an asterisk\n");
Characters that are special and mean something different outside of quotes include . * + ? | ^ $ < > [ ] ( ) { } /. Some of those only have special meaning if they appear at certain places, but its generally clearer to quote them regardless of where they appear if you want to match the literal characters.
I am trying to create a Lexer/Parser with ANTLR that can parse plain text with 'tags' scattered inbetween.
These tags are denoted by opening ({) and closing (}) brackets and they represent Java objects that can evaluate to a string, that is then replaced in the original input to create a dynamic template of sorts.
Here is an example:
{player:name} says hi!
The {player:name} should be replaced by the name of the player and result in the output i.e. Mark says hi! for the player named Mark.
Now I can recognize and parse the tags just fine, what I have problems with is the text that comes after.
This is the grammar I use:
grammar : content+
content : tag
| literal
;
tag : player_tag
| <...>
| <other kinds of tags, not important for this example>
| <...>
;
player_tag : BRACKET_OPEN player_identifier SEMICOLON player_string_parameter BRACKET_CLOSE ;
player_string_parameter : NAME
| <...>
;
player_identifier : PLAYER ;
literal : NUMBER
| STRING
;
BRACKET_OPEN : '{';
BRACKET_CLOSE : '}';
PLAYER : 'player'
NAME : 'name'
NUMBER : <...>
STRING : (.+)? /* <- THIS IS THE PROBLEMATIC PART !*/
Now this STRING Lexer definition should match anything that is not an empty string but the problem is that it is too greedy and then also consumes the { } bracket tokens needed for the tag rule.
I have tried setting it to ~[{}]+ which is supposed to match anything that does not include the { } brackets but that screws with the tag parsing which I don't understand either.
I could set it to something like [ a-zA-Z0-9!"ยง$%&/()= etc...]+ but I really don't want to restrict it to parse only characters available on the british keyboard (German umlaute or French accents and all other special characters other languages have must to work!)
The only thing that somewhat works though I really dislike it is to force strings to have a prefix and a suffix like so:
STRING : '\'' ~[}{]+ '\'' ;
This forces me to alter the form from "{player:name} says hi!" to "{player:name}' says hi!'" and I really desperately want to avoid such restrictions because I would then have to account for literal ' characters in the string itself and it's just ugly to work with.
The two solutions I have in mind are the following:
- Is there any way to match any number of characters that has not been matched by the lexer as a STRING token and pass it to the parser? That way I could match all the tags and say the rest of the input is just plain text, give it back to me as a STRING token or whatever...
- Does ANTLR support lookahead and lookbehind regex expressions with which I could match any number of characters before the first '{', after the last '}' and anything inbetween '}' and '{' ?
I have tried
STRING : (?<=})(.+)?(?={) ;
but I can't seem to get the syntax right because that won't compile at all, which leads me to believe that ANTLR does not support lookahead and lookbehind syntax, but I could not find a definitive answer on the internet to that question.
Any advice on what to do?
Antlr does not support lookahead or lookbehind. It does support non-greedy wildcard matches, but only when the .* non-greedy wildcard is followed in the rule with the termination sequence (which, as you say, is also contained in the match, although you could push it back into the input stream).
So ~[{}]* is correct. But there's a little problem: lexer rules are (normally) always active. So that lexer rule will be active inside the braces as well, which means that it will swallow the entire contents between the braces (unless there are nested braces or braces inside quotes or some such, and that's even worse).
So you need to define different lexical contents, called "lexical modes" in Antlr. There's a publically viewable example in the Antlr Definitive Reference, which shows a solution to a very similar problem: parsing HTML.
I need a regular expression able to match everything but a string starting with a specific pattern (specifically index.php and what follows, like index.php?id=2342343).
Regex: match everything but:
a string starting with a specific pattern (e.g. any - empty, too - string not starting with foo):
Lookahead-based solution for NFAs:
^(?!foo).*$
^(?!foo)
Negated character class based solution for regex engines not supporting lookarounds:
^(([^f].{2}|.[^o].|.{2}[^o]).*|.{0,2})$
^([^f].{2}|.[^o].|.{2}[^o])|^.{0,2}$
a string ending with a specific pattern (say, no world. at the end):
Lookbehind-based solution:
(?<!world\.)$
^.*(?<!world\.)$
Lookahead solution:
^(?!.*world\.$).*
^(?!.*world\.$)
POSIX workaround:
^(.*([^w].{5}|.[^o].{4}|.{2}[^r].{3}|.{3}[^l].{2}|.{4}[^d].|.{5}[^.])|.{0,5})$
([^w].{5}|.[^o].{4}|.{2}[^r].{3}|.{3}[^l].{2}|.{4}[^d].|.{5}[^.]$|^.{0,5})$
a string containing specific text (say, not match a string having foo):
Lookaround-based solution:
^(?!.*foo)
^(?!.*foo).*$
POSIX workaround:
Use the online regex generator at www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/misc/non-match-regex
a string containing specific character (say, avoid matching a string having a | symbol):
^[^|]*$
a string equal to some string (say, not equal to foo):
Lookaround-based:
^(?!foo$)
^(?!foo$).*$
POSIX:
^(.{0,2}|.{4,}|[^f]..|.[^o].|..[^o])$
a sequence of characters:
PCRE (match any text but cat): /cat(*SKIP)(*FAIL)|[^c]*(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)*/i or /cat(*SKIP)(*FAIL)|(?:(?!cat).)+/is
Other engines allowing lookarounds: (cat)|[^c]*(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)* (or (?s)(cat)|(?:(?!cat).)*, or (cat)|[^c]+(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)*|(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)+[^c]*) and then check with language means: if Group 1 matched, it is not what we need, else, grab the match value if not empty
a certain single character or a set of characters:
Use a negated character class: [^a-z]+ (any char other than a lowercase ASCII letter)
Matching any char(s) but |: [^|]+
Demo note: the newline \n is used inside negated character classes in demos to avoid match overflow to the neighboring line(s). They are not necessary when testing individual strings.
Anchor note: In many languages, use \A to define the unambiguous start of string, and \z (in Python, it is \Z, in JavaScript, $ is OK) to define the very end of the string.
Dot note: In many flavors (but not POSIX, TRE, TCL), . matches any char but a newline char. Make sure you use a corresponding DOTALL modifier (/s in PCRE/Boost/.NET/Python/Java and /m in Ruby) for the . to match any char including a newline.
Backslash note: In languages where you have to declare patterns with C strings allowing escape sequences (like \n for a newline), you need to double the backslashes escaping special characters so that the engine could treat them as literal characters (e.g. in Java, world\. will be declared as "world\\.", or use a character class: "world[.]"). Use raw string literals (Python r'\bworld\b'), C# verbatim string literals #"world\.", or slashy strings/regex literal notations like /world\./.
You could use a negative lookahead from the start, e.g., ^(?!foo).*$ shouldn't match anything starting with foo.
You can put a ^ in the beginning of a character set to match anything but those characters.
[^=]*
will match everything but =
Just match /^index\.php/, and then reject whatever matches it.
In Python:
>>> import re
>>> p='^(?!index\.php\?[0-9]+).*$'
>>> s1='index.php?12345'
>>> re.match(p,s1)
>>> s2='index.html?12345'
>>> re.match(p,s2)
<_sre.SRE_Match object at 0xb7d65fa8>
Came across this thread after a long search. I had this problem for multiple searches and replace of some occurrences. But the pattern I used was matching till the end. Example below
import re
text = "start![image]xxx(xx.png) yyy xx![image]xxx(xxx.png) end"
replaced_text = re.sub(r'!\[image\](.*)\(.*\.png\)', '*', text)
print(replaced_text)
gave
start* end
Basically, the regex was matching from the first ![image] to the last .png, swallowing the middle yyy
Used the method posted above https://stackoverflow.com/a/17761124/429476 by Firish to break the match between the occurrence. Here the space is not matched; as the words are separated by space.
replaced_text = re.sub(r'!\[image\]([^ ]*)\([^ ]*\.png\)', '*', text)
and got what I wanted
start* yyy xx* end
need help regarding context free grammar. I want a cfg in which letter b is never tripled. This means that no word contains the substring bbb in it. Language contains only letters {a,b}
Here is a helpful recursive definition of this language:
the empty string is in the language
b is in the language
bb is in the language
if x is a string in the language, then xa is in the language
if x is a string in the language, then xab is in the language
if x is a string in the language, then xabb is in the language
nothing else is in the language unless by the above rules
First, let's make sure this definition is right. It is not hard to argue that this definition defines strings that must be in our target language; no string with the substring bbb can satisfy the above rules. Does the definition cover all cases so that all strings without the substring bbb work? In fact, it must. Consider any string in the language. It either has length less than three (in this case, we can check all possible strings are treated correctly, which they are); for longer strings, they must end with a, ab or abb (they cannot end with bbb). Our rules imply the existence of a string x in the language without these suffixes, which can be recursively checked for membership. This can be reversed to yield a convincing proof by mathematical induction.
With a recursive definition like the above in hand, we can just write down the corresponding grammar:
S -> e | b | bb | Sa | Sab | Sabb
The real ingenuity here was getting the definition. How did I do that? I thought of the shortest strings in the language - the unique ones, that don't fit a pattern - and then I asked how to make longer strings from shorter ones. That is, given a string in the language, how do you make one bigger? That's the key to what context-free grammars let us do.
Being new to Xtext I would like to know how to define the upper and lower boundaries regarding the occurrence of a letter.
I know of the following expressions / operators
exactly one (the default, no operator)
one or none (operator ?)
any (zero or more, operator *)
one or more (operator +)
Given the examples
<IS123A4>
<IS12>
<ISB123455>
how do I describe the grammar for the rule that after "IS" 1-25 alphanumeric letters may appear.
Currently, I have
`terminal ISCONCEPTAME : '<IS' ALPHANUM ALPHANUM? ALPHANUM? ALPHANUM?.....'>';`
`terminal ALPHANUM: ('a'..'z'|'A'..'Z'|'_'|INT);`
However, I am not sure if it is the right way to do it. I was thinking about something like
`terminal ISCONCEPTAME : '<IS' ALPHANUM{1,25} '>';`
Thanks for any input!